STATE  OF  NEW-YORK. 


No-  25. 


IN  SENATE, 

February  6,  1845. 


MESSAGE 

From  the  Governor,  transmitting  a  memorial  from 
the  Pilots  of  New- York. 

Executive  Chamber,  ) 
Albany^  Feb.  3,  1845.  ] 

TO  THE  LEGISLATURE. 

I  herewith  transmit  a  memorial  from  the  pilots  of  New- York,  which 
has  been  placed  in  my  hands  by  a  committee  from  the  body  of  the 
pilots,  with  a  request  that  I  would  cause  it  to  be  laid  before  the  Le- 
gislature, and  invoke  its  consideration  of  the  subject  of  it.  I  deem 
it  but  just  to  that  class  of  public  commercial  agents  to  comply  with 
their  request. 

Without  entering  upon  the  discussion  of  the  questi'on,  as  to  how  far 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  has  made  the  regulation  of  pilots 
and  pilotage  one  of  Federal,  or  of  State  jurisdiction,  it  is  sufficient 
for  my  purpose  to  remark,  that  the  only  action  of  Congress,  upon  the 
subject,  from  the  establisliment  of  the  Federal  Government  up  to  the 
year  1837,  was,  by  a  law  passed  on  the  7th  day  of  August,  1789,  to 
refer  the  whole  matter  to  the  legislation  of  the  States,  until  its  fur- 
ther action. 


The  loss  of  a  couple  of  vessels,  with  numerous  lives,  in  or  near 
[Senate,  No.  25.]  1  (3  t.) 


\jj<l'f  2  [Senate 

the  harbor  of  New-York,  during  the  early  part  of  the  winter  of  1836 
-7,  gave  rise  to  many  and  aggravated  charges  of  negligence  and 
abuse  against  the  New-York  pilots,  and  an  application  was  made  to 
Congress  to  interfere,  by  what  was  claimed  to  be  its  proper  constitu- 
tional authority,  and  break  up  what  was  charged  as  a  monopoly  en- 
joyed by  those  pilots,  under  the  then  existing  State  law,  leading  to 
the  negligence  and  abuses  complained  of. 

Congress  did  interfere,  and,  on  the  third  day  of  March,  1837,  pas- 
sed a  law  declaring  that  "  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  the  master 
and  commander  of  any  vessel  coming  into  or  going  out  of  any  port 
situated  upon  waters  which  are  the  boundary  between  two  States,  io 
employ  any  pilot  duly  licensed  or  authorized  by  the  laws  of  either  of 
the  States  bounded  by  said  waters,  to  pilot  any  vessel  to  or  from  said 
port,  any  law,  usage,  or  custom  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding." 

Long  before  the  establishment  of  the  Federal  Government,  the 
State  of  New-York,  as  a  Colony,  and  as  a  State,  had  made  the  pilot- 
age of  the  port  of  New-York,  a  subject  of  legislative  regulation,  and 
after  that  time  up  to  the  passage  by  Congress  of  the  act  of  1837, 
before  referred  to,  it  had  been  subject,  and  only  subject,  to  its  ex- 
clusive legislation.    This,  with  the  extensive,  and  constantly  increas- 
ing commerce  of  that  port,  had  naturally  raised  up  a  body  of  pilots, 
who  made  piloting  vessels  into  and  out  of  that  port  their  profession 
or  calling,  and  who  depended  upon  that  business  for  the  support  of 
themselves  and  their  families.    The  rigid  provisions  in  reference  to 
their  qualifications  and  skill,  which  had,  for  a  long  term  of  yearsy 
characterized  our  legislation  upon  the  subject,  had  made  it  a  profes- 
sion difficult  and  expensive  in  the  acquirement,  and  it  was  the  policy 
of  those  laws  to  give  it  commensurate  value,  by  confining  the  busi- 
ness, as  in  other  professions,  to  pilots  duly  and  legally  licensed.  I 
believe  I  may  say,  that  as  a  body  of  men,  during  all  this  period,  the 
pilots  of  the  port  of  New-York,  would  bear  a  favorable  comparison 
with  the  pilots  of  any  other  port  in  the  Union,  or  in  the  world,  wheth- 
er as  to  their  fidelity  and  skill  as  pilots,  or  their  patriotism  or  respec- 
tability as  citizens. 

The  unfortunate  loss  of  the  vessels  referred  to,  at  New- York,  in 
1836-7,  produced  great  excitement  throughout  the  country,  and  the 
blame  was  charged  upon  the  pilots  of  that  port.    It  was  charged  that 


No.  25.] 


3 


the  monopoly  they  enjoyed  of  the  business  of  piloting  vessels,  had 
made  them  negligent  and  indifferent,  and  that  the  pilot  stations  were 
not  properly  or  faithfully  supplied,  during  the  inclement  and  danger- 
ous seasons  of  the  year. 

Acting  under  the  impression  that  these  charges  were  justly  made 
against  the  pilots,  as  is  believed.  Congress  passed  the  law  of  1837, 
which  has  been  quoted,  having  for  its  object  to  introduce  competition 
from  the  adjoining  State  of  New  Jersey,  to  break  up  the  supposed  in- 
jurious monopoly,  and  to  secure  vigilance  on  the  part  of  the  pilots. 

It  cannot  fail  to  be  seen  that  this  legislation  on  the  part  of  Con- 
gress, was  very  partial  in  its  application,  only  affecting  the  pilots  of 
those  ports  and  harbors,  the  waters  of  which  embraced  a  boundary 
betw^een  States.  No  portion  of  the  pilots  of  many  entire  States  were 
at  all  affected  by  it,  and  only  those  employed  at  particular  ports,  in 
any  State.  This  mode  of  exercising  a  federal  power,  within  the  lim- 
its of  the  Constitution,  has  been  broadly  questioned.  The  power,  if 
it  be  federal,  is  universal  and  equal  over  the  whole  Union,  and  if 
put  in  exercise  at  all,  it  may  well  be  questioned  whether  that  exercise 
should  not  also  be  universal  and  equal.  The  latitude  of  a  harbor,  the 
depth  of  its  water,  or  the  number  of  its  islands,  might,  it  appears  to 
me,  be  made  tlie  rule  of  application,  with  as  much  show  of  principle, 
as  the  fact  that  a  boundary  between  States  passes  through  it. 

So  also  the  principle,  that  Congress  can  make  a  law  of  one  State 
operate  in  another,  or  give  to  a  license,  granted  by  the  authority  of 
one  State,  force  in  another,  appears  to  me  to  be  equally  unsound  and 
dangerous.  It  Is  assuming  that  Congress  may,  as  a  raode  of  exercis- 
ing a  federal  power,  adopt  the  legislation,  existing  or  prospective,  of 
the  States,  and  give  to  it  federal  extension  and  supremacy,  instead  of 
legislating  itself  to  carry  the  power  into  effect.  These  objections 
appear  to  me  to  exist  against  the  law  of  Congress  of  1837,  without 
questioning  the  full  power  of  Congress  to  legislate  itself  as  to  the 
whole  subject  of  pilots  and  pilotage,  a  power  the  existence  of  which 
it  is  not  my  purpose  to  admit  or  deny,  upon  this  occasion. 

The  same  casualties  which  awakened  the  attention  of  Congress  to 
this  subject,  also  excited  the  legislation  of  the  State  to  investigation 
and  action  upon  the  same  subject. 


4  [Senate 

The  result  of  the  investigation  instituted  was  to  show,  as  I  believe, 
to  the  satisfaction  of  all,  and  to  produce  the  universal  admission,  that 
the  charges  against  the  New-York  pilots  were  wholly  unfounded,  and 
that  the  loss  of  the  vessels  was  in  no  way  attributable  to  any  negli- 
gence or  fault  on  their  part.  This  disposed  of  the  ground  upon 
which  Congress  was,  undoubtedly,  induced  to  attempt  this  partial  ex- 
ercise of  its  authority  over  the  subject  of  pilotage. 

The  State  legislation  consequent  upon  this  excitement  of  feeling, 
was  an  entire  new  law  for  the  licensing  and  government  of  the  pilots 
of  the  port  of  New- York,  which  was  passed  on  the  12th  day  of  April, 
1837,  but  little  more  than  a  month  after  the  passage  of  the  law  of 
Congress  of  that  year.  This  law  opened  materially  the  regulations 
for  licensing  pilots,  and  increased  the  restraints  and  responsibilities 
upon  those  who  should  take  a  license,  and  enter  upon  the  business  ; 
while  the  monopolizing  features  of  the  former  laws  were  entirely  re- 
moved, and  the  fullest  competition  opened  and  invited  between  the 
pilots  attached  to  every  different  pilot  boat.  The  terms  of  appren- 
ticeship necessary  to  entitle  the  apprentice  to  a  license  were  materi- 
ally shortened,  and  at  the  discretion  of  tlie  commission  constituted, 
persons  who  had  served  no  apprenticeship  could  be  licensed  upon  ex- 
amination. Every  pilot's  license  was  to  be  renewed  annually  ;  every 
pilot  was  to  give  a  bond  with  sureties,  to  be  forfeited  and  paid,  in 
case  his  carelessness,  or  want  of  skill,  should  damage  the  vessel  or 
property  entrusted  to  his  care,  and  rigid  provisions  were  enacted  for 
the  constant  occupation  and  supply  of  the  pilot  stations,  in  which 
every  boat  was  to  take  its  regular  turn.  Other  provisions  of  a  rigid 
and  onerous  character  upon  the  New-York  pilots,  are  also  found 
throughout  this  law,  and  the  charges  for  piloting  every  vessel  in  or 
out  of  the  port  are  specifically  fixed. 

The  pilots  cheerfully  accepted  of  the  terms,  and  energetically  en- 
tered upon  their  difficult  and  dangerous  duties  under  the  new  law,  and 
soon  found  others — strangers  to  them,  to  the  law  of  their  State,  and 
free  from  its  restrictions  and  responsibilities — acting  as  their  compe- 
titors. If  they  attempted  to  enforce  against  these  competitors  the 
prohibitions  of  the  law  of  the  State,  the  act  of  Congress  of  1837,  and 
a  license  from  a  neighboring  State,  were  interposed,  and  proved  to  be 
effectual  exemptions  before  the  municipal  courts.   In  this  way,  pilots 


N0.25.J 


5 


who  were  under  no  obligation  to  supply  the  pilot  stations,  had  given 
no  bond,  had  served  no  apprenticeship,  had  undergone  no  examina- 
tion, and  restrained  by  no  legal  regulation  of  charges,  were  found  to 
occupy  a  position  of  equality  with  them,  at  their  own  docks  and  in 
their  own  harbor. 

Nor  were  they,  as  a  universal,  or  even  a  general  rule,  citizens  or 
inhabitants  of  another  State,  but  residents  of  the  same  city  with  them- 
selves, who  having  taken  a  license  from  another  State,  were  entirely 
at  liberty  to  be  pilots  in  fair  w^eather,  and  landsmen  in  foul,  if  that 
should  be  their  pleasure — entirely  at  liberty  to  follow  the  profession 
of  pilots  during  those  portions  of  the  year  when  the  hazards  are  least 
and  commerce  is  most  full,  and  to  leave  the  stations  to  the  regularly 
licensed  pilots  of  the  State,  at  all  other  times,  in  case  they  should  find 
that  course  most  pleasant  or  profitable. 

Such  has  continued  to  be  the  state  of  things,  since  the  passage  of 
the  act  of  Congress  of  1837,  and  the  State  law  of  the  same  year  ; 
and  it  appears  to  me,  that  under  regulations  so  unequal,  the  New-York 
pilots  have  just  cause  for  complaint.  They  claim  that  either  the  law 
of  Congress  should  be  repealed,  and  all  the  pilots  of  the  port  subjected 
alike  to  the  provisions  and  restrictions  of  the  State  law,  or  that  the  re- 
strictions of  the  State  law  should  be  removed  from  them,  and  they  left, 
like  the  pilots  who  carry  the  licenses  of  other  States,  under  the  simple 
enactment  of  the  law  of  Congress.  To  my  mind  this  demand  seems  to 
be  just,  and  I  know  of  no  body  to  which  our  own  pilots  can  so  properly 
appeal  to  do  them  this  justice,  as  to  the  legislation  of  their  own  State. 

The  New-York  pilots  have,  for  years,  applied  in  vain  to  Congress 
to  repeal  its  law,  and  now  they  come  to  their  own  Legislature  and  ask 
of  it  to  lend  them  its  weight  in  the  renewal  of  that  application,  or  to 
so  modify  its  own  legislation  as  to  place  them  upon  an  equality  with 
others,  imder  the  law  of  Congress.  My  own  impression  is,  that  if 
the  Legislature  should  consider  it  wise  and  prop.^r  to  invoke  the  atten- 
tion of  Congress  to  the  inequality  and  injustice  caused  by  the  law  of 
1837,  and  to  the  dangers  to  the  commerce  of  the  port  of  New-York 
of  a  repeal  of  the  State  law,  and  an  abandonment  of  all  the  pilots  of 
the  port  to  the  loose  and  indefinite  regulations  of  the  act  of  Con- 
gress, the  consequence  would  be  a  repeal  of  that  act,  leaving  again  the 
whole  subject  to  the  regulation  of  the  Legislature  of  the  State,  where. 


6 


[Senate 


for  about  half  a  century  after  the  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution, 
it  so  safely  reposed.  In  any  event,  I  think  the  petitioners  entitled  to 
the  careful  attention  of  the  Legislature,  and  respectfully  request  that 
attention  for  them. 

The  memorial  is  accompanied  by  an  argument  of  the  questions  of 
principle,  which  the  petitioners  suppose  to  be  involved  in  their  appli- 
cation, and  I  take  leave  to  present  it  to  the  Legislature,  with  their 
petition. 


SILAS  WRIGHT. 


MEMORIAL 


In  presenting  the  annexed  memorial,  the  pilots  of  Ne^-York  sub- 
mit  the  following  considerations  to  the  Legislature,  expecting  to  esta- 
blish that  the  act  of  Congress  of  the  4th  of  March,  1837,  is  a  mani- 
fest infraction  of  the  federal  compact,  impairing,  if  not  effectually  un- 
dermining, the  sovereignty  of  the  Slates. 

The  course  of  legislation  by  the  Federal  and  State  Governments 
has  placed  this  subject  in  a  condition  of  confusion  and  disorganiza- 
tion wholly  incompatible  with  the  importance  of  it. 

The  power  of  the  Federal  Government  to  legislate  arises  from  the 
exclusive  grant  in  the  Constitution  that  Congress  shall  "  regulate  com- 
merce with  foreign  nations,  and  among  the  several  States,  and  with 
the  Indian  tribes.  " 

The  States  exercise  the  same  power  of  legislation  under  their  ac- 
knowledged rights  to  regulate  their  police,  their  domestic  trade,  and 
to  govern  their  own  citizens. 

It  would  therefore  appear  that  the  government  of  pilots  is  one  of 
those  subjects  over  w^hich  the  United  States  and  the  individual  States 
must,  of  necessity,  exercise  concurrent  or  co-ordinate  jurisdiction. 
The  States  under  our  political  system  may  exercise  their  imperfect 
right  until  it  comes  practically  in  collision  with  the  actual  exercise  of 
the  same  congressional  power.  As  soon  as  such  collision  occurs,  the 
right  of  the  State,  being  subordinate  to  that  of  Congress,  must  be  sur- 
rendered, and  yield  to  the  more  absolute  power,  under  the  6th  article 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  This  Constitution,  a)id  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  inhich  shall  be  made  in  pursuance  thereof^  and 
all  treaties  made,  or  which  shall  be  made  under  the  authority  of  the 
United  States,  shall  he  the  swpreme  law  of  the  landP 

It  is  well  known,  that  under  the  confederation,  the  regulation  of 
commerce  was  committed  to  the  respective  States,  each  for  itself;  and 
in  the  exercise  of  it,  and  the  acknowledged  rights  of  sovereignty,  the 
States  respectively,  as  necessity  required,  adopted  a  pilot  system  co- 
extensive with  their  territorial  limits,  and  on  the  high  seas. 

At  the  first  session  of  Congress,  begun  and  held  at  the  city  of  New- 
York,  on  Monday,  the  4th  of  March,  1789,  (the  first  day  the  Consti- 


8 


[Senate 


tution  commenced  its  operation,)  Congress  was  employed  in  filliiig 
out,  by  legislation,  the  distributed  grants,  which  became  the  subjects 
of  its  jurisdiction,  and  on  the  7th  of  August  following,  passed  an  act 
adopting  the  pilot  systems  of  the  several  States  in  the  Union,  in  gene- 
ral terms — "  That  all  pilots  in  the  bays,  rivers,  inlets,  harbors,  and 
ports  of  the  United  States,  shall  continue  to  be  regulated  in  confor- 
mity with  the  existing  laws  of  the  States  respectively,  wherein  such 
pilots  may  5e,  or  with  such  laws  as  the  States  may  respectively  here- 
after enact  for  the  purpose,  until  future  legislative  provision  by  Con- 
gress." By  that  act  the  laws  of  the  States  were  engrafted  on  the 
legislative  code  of  the  Federal  Government  for  the  regulation  of  pi- 
lots, and  in  virtue  of  the  prospective  authority  of  that  act,  the  State 
of  New- York  continued  to  legislate  on  the  subject  until  as  recently  as 
the  12th  of  April,  1838;  without  interruption,  until  the  4th  of  March, 
1837 — a  period  of  about  fifty  years. 

The  disasters  during  the  winter  of  1837,  suggested  to  Congress  the 
necessity  of  providing  more  adequate  laws,  to  prevent  the  recurrence 
of  similar  misadventures.  To  accomplish  that  object,  on  the  4th 
of  March  an  act  was  passed,  consisting  of  a  single  section,  in 
the  following  words :  "  An  act  concerning  pilots.  Be  it  enacted, 
that  it  shall  and  may  he  lawful  for  the  master  or  commander  of  any 
vessel  coming  into  or  going  6ut  of  any  port  situate  upon  waters  which 
are  the  boundary  between  two  States,  to  employ  any  pilot  duly  licensed 
or  authorized  by  the  laws  of  either  of  the  States  bounded  on  the 
said  waters  to  pilot  any  vessel  to  or  from  said  port,  any  law,  usage  or 
Custom  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."  In  the  exercise  of  the  sove- 
reign political  power  of  this  State,  laws  have  been  enacted  for  the 
licensing  and  government  of  pilots  of  the  port  of  New-York,  requi- 
ring those  appointed,  not  alone  to  possess  suitable  qualification,  but  to 
furnish  sufficient  security  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  their  appropri- 
ate duties ;  likewise  visiting  delinquency  and  misconduct  with  pains 
and  penalties.  Confiding  in  the  protection  implicitly  guarantied,  on 
the  faith  of  this  State,  they  invested  their  fortunes  in  the  purchase, 
building  and  equipment  of  vessels  necessary  for  the  efficient  execution 
of  their  office,  when  precipitate  legislation  opened  the  enjoyment  of 
the  exclusive  privileges  conferred  on  them,  to  the  citizens  of  an  ad- 
joining State,  to  he  exercised  within  the  territorial  confines  of  their  own. 
It  is  not  that  Congress  has  legislated  within  its  appropriate  sphere, 
that  they  complain,  but  that  in  such  legislation  its  constitutional  au- 
thority has  been  transcended,  and  the  sovereignty  of  their  State  has 
been  invaded  to  their  exclusive  prejudice. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  regulation  of  commerce  includes  that  of  navi- 
gation, and  that  the  authority  of  Congress,  though  limited  to  speci- 
fied objects,  is  plenary  as  to  those  objects;  but  it  is  denied  that  the 
sovereignty  of  Congress  permits  an  invasion  of  the  sovereignty  of  a 
State,  in  matters  known  and  acknowledged  to  pertain  to  State  sove- 
reignty. Had  Congress  assumed  the  task  of  regulating  the  pilot  sys- 
tem in  all  its  branches ;  had  it  conferred  on  the  Executive  of  the 
Federal  Government,  the  appointment  of  pilots,  and  assigned  to 
those  thus  appointed  the  limits  within  which  to  exercise  their  func- 


No.  25.] 


9 


tions,  your  memorialists  would  have  been  sensible  that  such  regulation 
was  in  the  exercise  of  a  constitutional  power ;  but  finding  that  under  the 
excitement  of  local  prejudice,  Congress  has  overstepped  constitutional 
bounds,  and  delegated  to  a  sister  State  the  right  of  appointing  muni- 
cipal officers  to  perform  their  functions  within  the  territorial  limits  of 
this  State,  they  claim  the  restraint  of  such  authority,  and  that  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  State  be  asserted  against  such  infringement  of  its  sove- 
reign rights.  The  Federal  Government  has  full  power  to  appoint  its 
own  officers  to  discharge  their  duties  every  where,  but  has  none  to  au- 
thorize the  exercise  of  the  municipal  jurisdiction  of  our  sovereign 
State  within  the  confines  of  another,  and  thus  perpetrate  consolida- 
tion in  its  most  hideous  deformity. 

It  is  a  well  settled  proposition  "  that  the  Federal  Government  can 
do  no  act  on  the  navigable  waters  within  the  limits  of  the  United 
States,  w^hich,  or  a  corresponding  act  to  which,  it  cannot  do  on  land 
within  the  same  limits."  If  therefore,  the  navigable  waters  belong 
no  more  to  the  Federal  Government,  and  are  not  otherwise  affected 
by  the  union  than  the  land  itself,  and  the  act  of  1837  is  within  the 
scope  of  federal  legislation,  in  authorizing  the  municipal  officers  of 
the  State  of  New-Jersey  to  discharge  their  duties  on  the  waters  of 
the  State  of  New- York,  it  may  with  equal  propriety  authorize  the 
former  State,  or  indeed  any  member  of  the  Union,  to  appoint  officers 
indiscriminately  to  perform  the  duties  of  their  office  on  land,  within 
the  same  limits.  That  doctrine  is  wholly  repugnant  to  the  idea  of 
sovereignty.  Such  control  deriving  validity  from  a  sovereign  power 
necessarily  implies  a  diminution  of  the  sovereignty  of  New- York, 
to  the  extent  <^  that  control,  and  an  investment  of  that  sovereignty 
in  the  State  of  New- Jersey,  to  the  same  extent  as  that  control  is  im- 
posed. The  jurisdiction  of  a  State  within  its  own  territory  is  exclu- 
sive and  absolute  and  is  susceptible  of  no  limitation  not  imposed  by 
itself.  In  adopting  the  Federal  Constitution,  the  States  invested 
Congress  with  the  power  to  regulate  commerce,  but  did  not  contem- 
plate that  Congress  should  delegate  that  right  (as  in  the  present  act 
exercised)  by  authorizing  one  State  to  license  officers  to  perform  the 
duties  of  their  appointment  within  the  territory  of  another. 

The  Congress  of  1789  w^as  in  part  composed  of  those  illustrious 
statesmen  who  framed  the  Constitution,  and  the  act  of  that  date  may 
be  regarded  as  a  contemporaneous  legislative  exposition  of  that  in- 
strument. That  Congress  well  understood  the  limit  of  Federal  and 
State  sovereignty  ;  and  moving  with  caution  and  circumspection,  did 
not  venture  to  trench  on  State  sovereignty,  but  "  exabundentia  cau- 
tela"  avoided  it,  and  limited  the  laws  of  the  respective  States  to  the 
pilots  of  the  respective  States,  the  act  declaring  "  That  all  pilots, 
&c.  &c.,  shall  continue  to  be  regulated  in  conformity  with  the  exist- 
ing laws  of  the  States  respectively  wherein  such  pilots  may  6e." 

Though  the  terms  of  the  act  of  1837,  invests  masters  of  vessels 
with  authority  to  employ  certain  pilots,  yet  the  aim,  object  and 
spirit  of  it  is  to  confer  the  power  in  the  pilots  to  act  rather  than  on  the 
masters  to  employ  them,  as  is  sufficiently  expressed  by  the  title  of  the 
single  section  act.    It  is  "  An  act  concerning  pilots."    Nor  is  it  an 

[Senate,  No.  25.]  2 


10 


[  Senate 


act  for  the  regulation  and  government  of  pilots^  but  designed  to  ex- 
tend the  field  of  operation,  heretofore  denied  to  the  citizens  of  the 
State  of  New-Jersey,  by  conferring  on  them,  in  common  with  the 
pilots  of  New-York,  the  right  of  piloting  vessels  on  the  exclusive 
waters  of  this  State  ;  for  exclusive  the  waters  are,  as  regards  the 
municipal  relations  of  this  State  ;  of  exercising  the  sovereignty  of 
New-Jersey  within  the  State  of  New-York,  their  only  power  to  -^.ct, 
springing  from  the  commission  of  that  State  ;  that  commission  being 
an  essential  portion  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  State  that  grants  it, 
proceeding  from  such  sovereign  power,  and  following  those  in  whom 
it  is  invested  beyond  the  confines  of  such  sovereignty.  The  expres- 
sion in  the  act  "  that  it  may  be  lawful  by  obvious  legal  intendment 
is,  that  it  was  unlawful  before,  or  is  a  grant  of  power  not  before  pos- 
sessed, as,  if  it  were  lawful  before  the  act  of  1837,  the  legislative 
declaration  to  that  effect  was  wholly  superfluous.  The  act  of  1837 
accomplishes  two  purposes.  First,  it  deprives  the  State  of  New^-York 
of  the  exclustve  authority  to  appoint  pilots  for  her  own  waters  ;  and 
second,  authorizes  the  State  of  New-Jersey  to  participate  equally  in 
that  right,  notwithstanding  the  supreme  court  of  the  United  States 
has  adjudged  that  the  licensing  of  pilots  is  embraced  in  the  power  of 
a  State  to  regulate  her  police,  her  domestic  trade  and  the  government 
of  her  own  citizens.  That  it  was  unlawful  before  that  act,  for  the 
pilots  of  New-Jersey  to  perform  their  functions  in  the  waters  of  New- 
York,  is  a  notorious  fact,  well  understood  by  the  citizimb  of  New- 
Jersey,  as  well  as  New-York  ;  so  well  understood  by  the  former,  that 
it  has  never  before  been  seriously  claimed.  All  the  right  arises  under 
the  act  of  1837,  and  is  now  enjoyed  in  most  successful  activity — a 
right  to  do  that  which  was  before  prohibited,  and  cautiously  guarded 
against  by  the  act  of  1789 — a  right  to  invade  the  sovereignty  of  this 
State — a  right  to  New- Jersey  to  employ  her  citizens  without  the  con- 
currence or  approbation  of  New-York,  even  against  her  will,  in  a 
pursuit  which  those  citizens  alone  of  New-York  can  be  engaged  in, 
who  are  licensed  by  that  State  to  which  they  owe  their  allegiance — a 
right  by  which  the  emissaries  of  a  foreign  State,  armed  with  the  com- 
mission of  their  sovereign,  are  exempted  from  the  operation  of  the 
laws  of  that  State  in  whose  confines  they  execute  the  duties  of  their 
office  ;  are  unrestrained  by  the  salutary  regulations  established  in  pur- 
suance of  such  laws,  and  rendered  amenable  alone  (if  it  all)  for  mis- 
conduct, to  that  State  whose  sovereignty  they  represent,  and  from 
which  they  derive  their  official  existence.  Is  this  consistent  with 
State  rights  and  State  sovereignty,  or  does  it  not  more  strongly  savor 
of  consolidation  ?  If  this  blending  of  jurisdiction  is  compatible  with 
sovereignty,  that  boasted  independence  is  but  a  theory. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  the  act  of  1837  "  has  occasioned  seri- 
ous difficulties  in  the  operation  of  the  pilot  system  of  the  United 
States,  and  brought  about  a  collision  of  jurisdiction,  first  between  the 
United  States  and  the  States  respectively,  and  next  between  States 
bordering  on  each  other,  and  bounded  by  navigable  waters,  as  speci- 
fied in  the  law.  The  collision  of  jurisdiction  between  the  United 
States  and  the  States,  is  rather  prospective  in  its  practical  operation  ; 


No.  25. J 


11 


but  it  is  a  collision,  in  principle,  on  the  threshold.  It  compels  one 
State  to  admit  and  tolerate,  within  its  own  jurisdiction,  the  action  and 
functions  of  a  municipal  license  issuing  from  another  State.  It  au- 
thorizes one  sovereign  State  to  invade,  in  this  manner,  the  waters, 
territories,  and  jurisdiction  of  another.  The  assumption  of  this  au- 
thority by  Congress  will,  we  think,  be  allowed  to  be  a  collision  of 
jurisdiction  between  the  United  States  and  the  States.  It  carries  vio- 
lence on  the  face  of  it.  It  requires  the  authorities  of  New-York 
(State  and  ci-y,)  to  recognize  pilots  acting  under  commissions  from 
the  State  of  New-Jersey,  and  to  admit  them  on  a  footing  of  equality 
with  their  own  pilots,  within  their  own  jurisdiction.  The  conse- 
quence already  is,  that  the  State  of  New-Jersey,  having  little  naviga- 
tion, issues  commissions  or  licenses  to  pilots,  not  so  much  because  the 
State  needs  their  services,  as  because  these  pilots  need  the  profits  of 
employment  under  the  jurisdiction  of  New-York.  New-York  hav- 
ing a  vast  interest  at  stake,  has  found  it  necessary  to  enact  an  ex- 
tended code  of  pilot  regulations,  prescribing  apprenticeship,  qualifica- 
tions, &c.,all  w^hich  are  disturbed,  trampled  on,  and  may  be  rendered 
of  no  effect,  by  enforcing  upon  them  New -Jersey  pilots,  acting  under 
New-Jersey  authorities. 

The  principle,  as  will  be  seen,  is  precisely  the  same  as  if  Con- 
gress had  passed  a  law^  to  enforce  every  State  to  give  full  credit  and 
scope  of  action  to  commissions  or  licenses  issued  by  any  other  State ; 
such,  for  example,  as  lawyers',  doctors',  tavern-keepers',  pedlars',  or 
any  other  licenses  usually  derived  from  municipal  authorities.  Was 
it  ever  supposed  that  Congress  had  this  power  l 

The  power^granted  to  Congress  by  the  Constitution  to  regulate 
commerce  among  the  several  States,"  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
a  power  to  impose  the  municipal  authorities  of  one  State  upon  those 
of  another,  as  is  the  effect  of  the  law  of  Congress  now  under  consi- 
deration. This  is  the  single  principle,  the  exact  shape  and  definite 
action  of  this  law,  viz  :  to  enforce  the  authorities  of  one  State  on 
those  of  another — a  principle,  as  cannot  be  denied,  of  disorganization 
and  aggression. 

"  Congress  shall  have  powder  to  regulate  commerce  between  the 
States,"  etc.  The  fair  interpretation  of  a  law  is  a  reasonable  one. 
One  of  the  first  and  fundanirental  principles  of  our  state  of  society  is 
the  sovereignty  of  the  States  within  their  own  jurisdiction,  as  to  "  all 
powers  not  delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  or 
prohibited  by  it  to  the  States ;"  and  the  question  now  before  us  is, 
whether  this  power  "  to  regulate  commerce  between  the  States"  would 
authorize  this  law  of  1837  1  We  think  not— first,  because  the  juris- 
diction assumed  is  personal  as  to  the  subject  of  it,  and  therefore  mu- 
nicipal. It  is  the  government  of  the  agent  of  commerce,  which  lies 
in  the  jurisdiction  o^'  a  State,  and  does  not  afiect  the  terms  or  condi- 
tions on  which  the  material  of  commerce  shall  pass  from  one  State  to 
another.  By  this  law  the  State  of  New-Jersey  may  and  does  p;ish 
its  jurisdiction  over  persons  into  the  State  of  New-York,  and  coin- 
pels  the  latter  to  admit  such  jurisdiction  by  surrendering  its  own,  so 


12 


[Senate 


far  as  the  regulation  of  the  personal  conduct  of  pilots  is  concerned  in 
their  professional  capacity,  and  as  to  the  terms  of  qualification. 

"  To  regulate  commerce  between  the  States" — to  prevent  one  State 
from  embarrassing  or  impeding  the  commerce  of  another  ;  to  pre- 
scribe, if  necessary,  the  terms  on  which  the  material  of  commerce 
shall  pass  from  one  State  to  or  through  another  ;  to  equalize  the 
terms  of  commercial  intercourse  ;  to  maintain  the  obligation  of  con- 
tracts throughout  the  Union  ;  to  provide  a  standard  of  common  cur- 
rency, etc.,  but  it  would  be  preposterous  to  suppose  that  this  power 
was  intended  to  authorize  Congress  to  compel  the  State  of  Georgia 
to  recognize  a  pedlar's  license  obtained  from  the  municipal  authori- 
ties of  South  Carolina,  or  to  surrender  jurisdiction  over  a  stage  dri- 
ver's functions  because  he  happened  to  take  up  his  whip  in  a  neigh- 
boring State.  Peddling  on  wheels  or  on  foot  is  commerce,  doubtless, 
as  much  so  as  shipping  ;  but  we  apprehend  that  a  nullification  tem- 
per would  be  extremely  prone  to  rise,  if  Congress  should  attempt  to 
force  a  pedlar's  license,  granted  by  one  State,  upon  another.  The 
pilot  is  a  pedlar — that  is,  he  is  the  agent  of  a  peddling  voyage,  and 
carries  in  his  pocket  a  municipal  commission  which  is  the  warrant  of 
his  occupation,  as  much  as  the  driver  of  a  pedlar's  wagon.  We  be- 
lieve it  will  be  admitted  as  sound  doctrine,  that  when  a  man  passes 
from  one  State  to  another,  his  personal  accountability  is  transferred 
to  the  latter.  He  cannot  be  amenable  to  both  jurisdictions  at  the 
same  time  and  for  the  same  acts.  The  reason  is,  because  the  laws  of 
the  State  left  behind  cannot  follow  or  reach  him — cannot  lap  over. 
Even  if  he  is  a  criminal  flying  from  justice,  he  cannot  be  overtaken 
by  the  authorities  he  has  violated  ;  but  they  are  compelled  to  resort 
to  another  power,  provided  by  the  federal  compact.  Jurisdiction  is 
sacred,  and  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  the  law  of  one  State  may 
prescribe  the  terms  and  modes  of  personal  acts  or  functions  performed 
in  another  State.  The  professional  functions  of  pilots  are  purely  per- 
sonal acts." 

It  is  conceded  that  an  officer  or  agent  of  the  United  States  must 
be  admitted  and  entertained  by  the  States  in  the  discharge  of  his  ap- 
propriate functions,  and  that  for  these  duties  he  comes  under  the  ju- 
risdiction of  the  authority  from  which  he  derives  his  commission.  For 
all  such  purposes,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  comprehends 
all  the  States.  But  it  will  be  seen  that  the  entrance  of  a  commission 
or  license  of  the  Federal  Government  into  the  jurisdiction  of  the  States 
for  such  purposes,  is  a  very  different  thing  from  the  entrance  and  ac- 
tion of  a  commission  or  license  of  any  one  of  the  States  into  the  terri- 
tories of  another.  We  are  not  aware  that  such  a  thing  can  possibly 
be,  in  any  propriety,  or  by  any  known  right ;  and  yet  this  is  precisely 
the  case  authorized  by  this  law  of  Congress.  Nor  would  it  be  suffi- 
cient to  say  that  the  New-Jersey  pilot  enters  the  waters  of  New- 
York  as  an  agent  of  the  Federal  Government,  because  it  is  not  a  fact. 
He  is  an  agent  of  the  State  of  New-Jersey,  so  far  as  the  immediate  de- 
rivation of  his  authority  is  concerned,  which,  we  conceive,  is  all  we 
have  to  consider.  A  commission  or  license  of  New-Jersey  is  forced 
upon  the  State  of  New-York. 


No.  25.] 


13 


If  Congress  had  assumed  jurisdiction  over  pilots  in  toto,  made  the 
necessary  regulations,  and  ordained  their  licenses  to  issue  immediately 
from  federal  authorities,  this  collision  of  State  jurisdiction  would  have 
been  avoided. 

Admitting  that  Congress  had  original  jurisdiction  in  the  case,  yet 
the  jurisdiction  was  in  the  state  of  a  non-user  ;  was  vacated  so  far  as 
the  action  of  the  Federal  Government  is  concerned  ;  was  conceded, 
indeed,  and  sanctioned  by  the  formal  acts  of  this  government,  in  favor 
of  the  States  ;  and  there  never  was  a  symptom  that  Congress  inten- 
ded to  assume  it  till  1837,  when  it  was  suddenly,  and  we  may  add, 
violently  taken,  without  even  the  courtesy  of  a  notice  served  on  the 
parties  concerned.  The  pilot  regulations  formed  apart,  in  some  States 
a  large  part,  of  the  municipal  code  of  those  which  had  ports  ;  and  the 
State  of  New-York,  at  the  very  moment  of  the  passage  of  this  law  of 
Congress,  in  1837,  was  revising  its  own  laws  on  this  subject,  and  in 
just  thirty-nine  days  thereafter  adopted  a  new  code,  consisting  of  two 
acts  and  fifty-two  sections,  many  of  those  sections  being  chapters  in 
themselves,  the  authority  and  effect  of  which  was  destroyed  by  this 
act  of  Congress,  so  far  as  the  scope  of  the  latter  extends  !  Is  not  this 
a  most  remarkable  collision  of  jurisdiction  ?  It  was  doubtless  proper, 
and  was  naturally  to  be  expected,  in  view  of  the  history  of  the  past, 
if  Congress  meditated  such  an  assumption — we  will  not  say  usurpa- 
tion— of  power — although  it  cannot  be  called  re-sumption,  for  they 
had  never  before  used  it — it  was  proper,  we  say,  that  a  notice  of  such 
purpose  should  have  been  served  on  the  States,  and  that  time  should 
have  been  allowed  the  State  authorities  to  accommodate  their  own 
position  to  this#new  position  of  the  Federal  Government,  so  seriously, 
extensively,  and  vitally  affecting  themselves.  We  say  vitally,  for  it 
is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  it  is  an  invasion  of  State  sovereignty. 
But  it  affected  their  convenience  and  paralyzed  the  arm  of  their  autho- 
rity, besides  leaving  them  open  to  privateering  incursions  from  neigh- 
boring States,  acting  under  commission  of  those  States,  with  the  au- 
thority of  the  United  States  to  back  them. 

The  design  of  the  act  of  1837  was  to  break  up  what  was  averred 
to  be  a  combination  among  the  pilots  of  New-York,  impairing  the 
fidelity  and  usefulness  of  the  service,  by  letting  in  upon  them  the  pi- 
lots of  New-Jersey,  with  a  view  of  introducing  a  fair  and  salutary 
competition. 

It  appears  that  the  supreme  legislative  authority  of  the  State  of 
New-York,  in  the  right  of  its  own  sovereignty,  in  the  good  faith  of 
the  act  of  Congress  of  1798,  and  in  accordance  with  all  usage  in 
these  United  States,  took  upon  itself  to  revise  and  amend  the  laws  of 
the  State  for  the  regulation  of  pilots,  in  consequence  of  the  public  ex- 
citement respectino;  the  loss  of  the  Bristol  and  Mexico,  and  simulta- 
neously with  the  action  of  Congress  on  the  same  subject,  for  the  same 
object.  It  is  evident,  from  an  examination  of  the  law  of  New- York, 
that  no  pains  or  expense  were  spared  to  obtain  all  information  that 
could  be  of  use,  and  that  the  committee  charged  with  the  duty  of  re- 
porting a  bill,  performed  their  task  with  great  fidelity.  Two  separate 
acts  were  prepared,  one  of  forty-four,  and  the  other  of  eight  sections, 


14  [Senate 

in  all  fifty-two,  altogether  of  such  extent  and  particularity  as  to  con- 
stitute a  proper  pilot  code.  The  twenty-third  section  of  the  first  act 
strikes  at  the  principle  of  combination  complained  of  as  the  great  evil,, 
and  is  a  full  and  sufficient  remedy,  if  faithfully  administered  by  the 
board  of  commissioners.    It  is  as  follows  : 

"  The  earnings  of  the  pilots  belonging  to  any  one  boat  shall  be 
equally  divided  among  the  pilots  of  said  boat ;  and  no  pilot  shall  par- 
ticipate, unless  authorized  by  the  commissioners,  in  the  earnings  of 
any  others  than  those  attached  to  the  same  boat  ;  and  for  breach  of 
this  provision,  any  pilot  or  pilots  shall  forfeit  his  or  their  license  or 
licenses." 

By  this  section,  and  others  provided  for  its  proper  execution,  eve- 
ry pilot  boat  has  a  separate  interest,  is  barred  from  combination  by 
heavy  penalties,  and  forced  into  competition  with  all  other  boats. 

As  a  matter  of  fact^  however,  we  have  the  published  testimony  of 
the  board  of  commissioners  that  no  such  combination  among  the 
New-York  pilots  has  existed  "  for  several  years  past."  Moreover, 
they  say  "  that  the  competition  existing  among  the  New-York  pilots 
is  equally,  if  not  more  strenuous,  than  that  existing  between  them 
and  the  New-Jersey  pilots.  We  know  this  to  be  the  fact  from  the 
report-books  of  the  last  three  year's  standing,  and  from  every  day's 
observation-  We  have  before  us  reports  made  by  them  (the  pilot 
boats)  against  each  other,  for  infringements  made  on  each  other's 
rights,  which  of  course  we  have  to  adjust.  The  date  of  this  evidence 
is  1840.  The  commissioners  also  certify  that  whatever  reform  has 
been  effected  "  has  been  the  result  solely  of  the  State  law  of  1837," 
meaning  to  the  exclusion  of  the  influence  of  the  law  of  Congress. 

The  understanding  established  by  the  act  of  Congress  of  1798,. 
between  the  Federal  Government  and  the  States,  upon  this  subject, 
was  the  result  of  experience  and  the  dictate  of  good  sense.  In  the  first 
place,  it  appears  to  have  been  seen  and  admitted — that  is  the  natural 
inference  from  the  transaction — that  the  regulations  of  the  pilots 
within  the  bounds  of  the  States,  is  properly  and  necessarily  a  part  of 
State  jurisdiction.  Next,  as  it  was  a  matter  of  great  importance  that 
it  should  be  attended  to,  this  act  of  Congress,  of  1798,  may  properly 
be  viewed  in  the  light  oif  a  declaration  on  the  part  of  Congress,  as  to 
the  right  of  sovereignty  in  this  particular,  and  a  full  concession  there- 
of to  the  States  ;  and  on  the  part  of  the  States  a  tacit  pledge,  and 
therefore,  an  understanding  or  covenant,  that  they,  the  States,  would 
faithfully  perform  this  part  of  their  duty.  They  had  done  it  before, 
and  they  have  done  it  ever  since.  It  was  a  usage  of  more  than  half 
a  century,  never  challenged,  and  was  solemnly  ratified  in  1798,  by 
the  very  party,  to  wit.  Congress,  which  broke  in  upon  it,  and  disturb- 
ed, not  to  say  violated  it,  by  the  act  of  1837. 

It  is  evident,  that  the  States  only  are  competent  to  attend  to  this 
business,  not  to  touch  the  question  of  right.  Look  at  the  two  acts  of 
New-York  in  1837,  and  to  the  act  of  Congress  of  the  same  year. 
The  former  is  an  extended  and  able  pilot  code,  providing  for  all  the 
necessities  of  the  service,  as  suggested  by  the  whole  history  of  New- 
York  navigation.    It  creates  a  branch  of  municipal  polity  of  great 


No.  25.] 


15 


dignity  and  consequence,  well  adapted  to  its  purposes.  It  shows  that 
all  concerned  in  it,  understood  the  subject,  and  commendably  dis- 
charged their  duty.  Whereas  the  contemporaneous  law  of  Congress 
evinces,  not  only  a  want  of  consideration,  but  great  ignorance  of  the 
subject.  There  is  but  one  single,  solitary  principle  in  it,  and  that, 
most  unfortunately,  is  a  principle  of  mischief — of  two-fold,  tri-fohi, 
manifold  mischief — a  naked  principle  of  aggression  in  the  first  stage, 
giving  birth  to  and  authorizing  nothing  but  aggression  in  all  other  of 
its  stages  and  forms.  The  moment  this  law  came  to  operate  in  the 
State  of  New-York,  or  in  any  other  State,  it  struck  at  the  sovereign- 
ty of  that  State,  suspended  its  authority  as  to  the  matter  in  question, 
and  forced  upon  its  jurisdiction  the  action  and  use  of  a  commission  or 
license  (municipal)  of  a  foreign  State.  It  is,  moreover,  a  violation  of 
the  pledged  faith  of  Congress — a  faith  as  solemnly  pledged  as  in  any 
part  or  parcel  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  and  is  a  matter  of  record 
in  the  journals  of  that  body,  and  incorporated  with  its  laws.  We 
venture  to  suggest,  that  such  a  hasty  act,  we  are  disposed  to  say,  er- 
ror of  legislation—  for  such  it  evidently  was — is  not  to  be  found  in 
our  annals.  We  are  confident  it  cannot  be  persisted  in  by  Congress, 
after  mature  reflection.  Are  they  prepared  to  say  to  this  country, 
that  they  will  sustain  such  a  wanton  invasion  of  State  rights  1  We 
say  wanton,  for  what  possible  good  can  result  from  it?  There  is  posi- 
tively nothing  but  evil,  without  considering  the  breach  of  faith,  and 
the  collision  of  jurisdiction.  The  regulation  of  the  pilots  of  our  wa- 
ters, must  be  either  in  the  care  of  the  United  States  or  of  the  States. 

The  jurisdiction  cannot  possibly,  certainly  not,  conveniently,  be 
divided.  We  t^iink  it  cannot  possibly.  It  must  be  entire  in  one  case 
or  the  other.  The  State  of  New-York  has  evinced  its  fitness  and 
competency,  by  its  elaborate  and  well  adapted  laws  of  1S37  ;  where- 
as Congress  has  laid  down  but  a  single  rule,  and  that  a  disorganizing 
one. 

But  we  think  it  certain,  that  the  States  will  not  submit  to  this  as- 
sumption of  power  over  their  heads,  in  violation  of  immemorial  usage, 
and  of  compact.  It  is  a  perfect  novelty,  an  unheard  of  event,  that  a 
municipal  commission  or  lieense  of  one  State  should  be  forced,  with 
all  its  powers  and  privileges,  upon  the  jurisdiction  of  another  State, 
to  suspend  and  nullify  the  authority  of  that  State!  And  yet  this  is  the 
naked  principle,  as  well  as  the  sum  and  substance  of  the  law  of 
Conrrress  of  1837.  It  contains  nothing  more,  and  nothing  less. 
There  is  nothing  but  mischief,  portentous  mischief,  in  the  act. 

In  the  same  manner  as  lawyers,  doctois,  and  other  professions, 
obtain  licenses  to  practice,  uftder  the  municipal  regulations  of  their 
respective  States,  granting  them  pe'culiar  and  exclusive  privileges,  as 
a  compensation  for  the  expenses  of  their  education  and  their  devotion, 
thus  qualified  to  callings  having  in  charge,  professionally,  the  welfare, 
fortunes  and  lives  of  the  community  ;  so  also  the  pilots  of  our  ports 
and  harbors,  having  qualified  themselves  by  a  long  course  of  training 
and  at  great  expense,  are  licensed  by  municipal  authorities,  and  are 
endowed  thereby  with  certain  exclusive  privileges,  in  the  use  of  which 
their  services  are  intimately  connected  with  the  wealth,  happiness, 


16 


[Senate 


and  lives  of  the  community.  It  is  scarcely  possible  to  name  a  more 
important  function,  in  the  ordinary  walks  of  life,  than  that  of  pilots. 
They  have  constantly  in  charge  immense  wealth  and  many  lives  of 
our  citizens.  Nor  can  they  transfer  the  use  of  their  talents  and  ac- 
quirments  to  another  place,  or  to  another  State,  if  they  are  injured.  A 
pilot  of  New-Orleans  might  as  well  go  to  the  moon,  as  to  New-York 
or  Boston,  and  vice  versa ;  for  he  is  only  qualified  to  act  where  he  is 
acquainted  with  the  pilot  grounds.  His  talents  are  of  no  use  to  him 
any  where  else. 

Besides,  it  is  to  be  considered,  that  the  public  authorities  never 
call  a  lawyer  to  account  for  losing  his  case,  or  a  doctor  for  losing  his 
patient,  unless  there  is  suspicion  of  crime ;  whereas,  a  pilot  is  liable 
to  penalties  for  every  loss  of  property  and  life  under  his  charge,  and 
is  obliged  to  give  bonds.  Other  professions  are  rarely  limited  by  law 
in  their  charges  ;  but  pilots  always  are.  The  rules  of  the  service  are 
many  and  strict,  and  the  vigilance  of  authority  great,  because  great 
interests  are  at  stake.  The  pilots  of  every  port  have  grown  up  un- 
der their  own  system,  and  are  compelled  to  rely  upon  the  uniform 
maintenance  of  that  system  for  their  own  livelihood,  and  that  of  their 
dependent  families.  Whereas,  this  new  law  of  Congress,  of  1837, 
takes  them  by  surprise,  invades  their  rights,  takes  away  the  small 
profits  of  their  profession,  and  blasts  their  prospects  of  living. 
They  are  entirely  powerless,  and  are  compelled,  unresistingly  and 
unjustly,  to  submit  to  the  incursions  of  foreigners,  acting  under 
the  commission  or  license  of  foreign  States,  thus  enforced  by  the  su- 
preme authority  of  the  nation,  to  take  away  the  earnings  and  bread 
of  those  who  had  consecrated  their  lives  to  this  service  for  the  sake 
of  the  pledged  benefit.  These  invaders  of  right,  having  never  served 
an  apprenticeship,  nor  conformed  to  the  rules  of  qualification,  as  es- 
tablished by  the  municipal  authority  of  the  jurisdiction  thus  entered, 
are  enabled  by  act  of  Congress,  to  jump  over  these  laws,  set  them 
at  defiance,  and  can  afford  so  to  underbid  the  lawful  tenants  of  the 
ground,  as  to  expel  them  even  from  competition — as  to  expel  them 
altogether  ;  and  the  next  thing  will  be  a  combination  of  foreigners, 
under  foreign  licenses,  in  possession  of  the  pilot  grounds  of  New- 
York.  This  will  be  the  inevitable  result.  The  service  must  neces- 
sarily be  depreciated  in  its  character,  and  all  the  experience  of  the 
local  authorities  lost,  in  the  loss  of  their  power  of  control.  The 
evil  is  immense.  It  is  not  only  a  great  injustice,  but  there  is  a  pub- 
lic and  authoritative  sanction  given  to  the  spirit  and  to  acts  of  disor- 
ganization, and  great  wealth  and  many  lives  are  put  in  jeopardy. 

Next,  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  board  of  commissioners  put 
over  the  pilots  of  New-York  city.  They  state,  first,  that  the  new- 
law  of  that  State  has  proved  eflfectual  for  purposes  of  reform,  so  far 
as  it  was  required.  Next,  to  the  point  and  fact  of  competition  be- 
tween the  pilots  of  New-York  ;  and,  lastly,  a  very  touching  certifi- 
cate to  the  excellence  of  their  character,  and  to  the  fidelity  of  their 
service. 

"  A  more  valuable,  capable,  deserving  and  enterprising  class  of  pi- 
lots, the  world  does  not  produce  ;  they  almost  daily  board  vessels  at 


No.  25. 1 


17 


sea,  from  fifteen  to  fifty,  one  hundred  and  fifty,  and  two  hundred 
miles  from  the  Hook ;  and  in  some  instances,  they  go  up  to  Nan- 
tucket and  St.  George's  Bank.  It  is  heart-rending  to  see  these  inva- 
ders of  our  State  rights,  board  vessels  along  side  the  dock,  and  carry 
them  to  sea,  to  the  exclusion  of  our  pilots  who  have  served  a  regular 
apprenticeship,  and  who  have  such  an  immense  capital  afloat.  If 
they  have  for  once  erred,  they  have  been  sufficiently  punished  for  it, 
and  have  made  ample  atonement  by  their  unexceptionable  conduct, 
and  a  probation  of  nearly  four  years.  The  General  Government,  as 
well  as  the  State,  may  be  assured  that  they  need  be  under  no  appre- 
hension of  neglect  of  dut}^  among  them,"  &c. 

And  this  testimony  from  the  commissioners  appointed  by  the  State, 
to  see  that  the  pilot  regulations  of  New- York  are  observed  and  exe- 
cuted : 

"This  board,"  they  say  themselves,  "is  composed  of  men  who 
have  sailed  from  this  port  as  long,  if  not  longer,  than  most  men 
who  have  made  the  sea  their  profession  ;  and  w^e  have  found,  from 
our  experience  of  from  thirty  to  thirty-five  years,  that  we  were  never 
at  a  loss  for  a  pilot,  except  when  a  great  influx  of  arrivals  took  place 
and  the  pilots  were  all  engaged,  which  has  some  years  past  been  the 
case,  and  caused  a  small  detention.  Since  that,  the  defect  has  been 
remedied  by  an  increase  in  the  number  of  pilots  ;  which  increase  has 
been  such,  and  shortly  w^ill  be  greater,  by  the  expiration  of  the  in- 
dentures of  apprentices,  that  they  will  scarcely  be  able  to  pay  ex- 
penses. This  board  would,  as  a  matter  of  impartial  justice,  beg  of 
Congress  either  to  cause  a  repeal  of  the  laws  w^hich  do  now  allow 
the  Jersey  pil(fts  to  pilot  in  our  waters,  or  place  them  under  the  same 
restrictions  as  those  to  which  our  pilots  are  subjected. 

"  The  State  of  New-Jersey  having  so  little  commerce,  found  no 
occasion  for  legislating  on  the  subject  of  pilots,  till  this  act  of  Con- 
gress of  1837,  and  then  her  object  could  not  be  legitimate  as  a  moral 
question,  because  it  was  only  to  depredate  on  the  rights  of  her  neigh- 
bors, New-York,  Pennsylvania  and  Delaware.  Immediately,  men 
could  come  from  Rhode-Island,  Connecticut,  from  the  west,  from 
any  where,  from  foreign  ports  even,  and  take  out  licenses  for  pilot- 
ing from  the  New- Jersey  authorities,  however  slender  their  qualifi- 
cations, and  be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  of  New- York  pilots. 

"The  State  of  Mississippi  only  waited  to  see  if  the  operations  of 
New-Jersey,  under  the  act  of  Congress,  w^ould  be  tolerated,  and  out 
came  her  act,  in  February,  1840,  to  license  forty  pilots  to  act  in  the 
mouths  and  passes  of  the  Mississippi.  She  even  went  to  Congress 
with  petitions  for  an  alteration  or  extension  of  the  law,  to  be  the 
more  secure  of  her  end.  Next,  perhaps,  we  shall  hear  of  a  State 
having  no  navigable  border,  taking  her  men  from  the  plough  to  pi- 
lot the  shipping  of  our  ports. 

"  The  city  of  New-York  is  already  supplied  with  nearly  a  hundred 
pilots  of  her  own,  regularly  trained  and  well  qualified,  who  have  a 
capital  of  §100,000  afloat  in  their  boats — a  property  which,  on  ac- 
count of  the  perils  to  which  it  is  exposed,  cannot  be  insured  at  any 

[Senate,  No.  25.]  3. 


18  [Senate 

rate  which  the  pilots  are  able  to  afford.  Neither  are  those  boats  fit 
for  any  other  service,  any  more  than  their  masters." 

Let  us  now  further  examine  the  practical  effect  of  the  act  of  1837  ; 
to  do  so,  a  reference  to  the  boundaries  of  this  State,  and  its  territo- 
rial jurisdiction  and  the  pilot  laws  since  1731,  becomes  necessary  to 
ascertain  the  extent  of  her  limits,  and  the  jurisdiction  w^hich  has  ever 
been  claimed  for  her,  in  regard  to  pilot  regulations.  Before  the 
compact  between  the  States  of  New-York  and  New  Jersey,  respect- 
ing their  territorial  limits  and  jurisdiction,  ratified  by  the  act  of  Con- 
gress of  June  28,  1834,  the  boundary  of  New-York  on  New -Jersey 
was  as  follows  :  from  a  "  rock  on  the  west  side  of  the  Hudson  river, 
in  the  latitude  of  forty-one  degrees  north,  marked  by  said  commis- 
sioners ;  thence  southerly  along  the  west  shore  at  low-water  mark  of 
the  Hudson  river,  of  the  Kill  Van  Kull,  of  the  sound  between  Staten- 
Tsland  and  New-Jersey,  and  of  Raritan  bay  to  Sandy-Hook."  Be- 
fore the  compact  of  1834,  the  boundary  of  New-York  extended  to 
low-water  mark  throughout  its  border  on  the  State  of  New-Jersey. 
The  compact  of  1834  does  not  vary  that  boundary  to  affect  this 
subject. 

"  Article  \st.  The  boundary  line  between  the  two  States  of  New- 
York  and  New-Jersey,  from  appoint  in  the  middle  of  Hudson  river, 
opposite  the  point  on  the  west  shore  thereof,  in  the  41st  degree  of 
north  latitude,  as  heretofore  ascertained  and  marked,  to  the  main  sea, 
shall  be  the  middle  of  the  said  river,  of  the  bay  of  New-York,  of  the 
waters  between  Staten  Island  and  New-Jersey,  and  of  Raritan  bay  to 
the  main  sea,  except  as  is  hereafter  otherwise  particularly  mentioned. 

"  Jlrticle  2d.  The  State  of  New-York  shall  retain  its  present  juris- 
diction over  Bedlow's  Island,  Ellis  Island,  and  shall  also  retain  ex- 
clusive jurisdiction  of  and  over  the  other  islands  lying  in  the  waters 
above  mentioned  and  now  under  the  jurisdiction  of  that  State. 

Article  Sd.  The  State  of  New-York  shall  have  and  enjoy  exclu- 
sive jurisdiction  of  and  over  all  the  waters  of  the  bay  of  New-York, 
and  of  and  over  all  the  waters  of  the  Hudson  river  lying  west  of 
Manhattan  Island,  and  to  the  south  of  the  mouth  of  Spuytenduyvil 
creek,  and  of  and  over  the  land  covered  by  the  said  waters,  to  the 
low-water  mark  on  the  westerly  or  New- Jersey  side  thereof,  subject 
to  the  following  rights  of  property  and  of  jurisdiction  of  the  State 
of  New-Jersey,  that  is  to  say — 

"  1st.  The  State  of  New- Jersey  shall  have  the  exclusive  right  of  pro- 
perty in  and  to  the  land  under  ivafer  lying  west  of  the  middle  of  the 
bay  of  New-York,  and  west  of  the  middle  of  that  part  of  Hudson 
river*which  lies  between  Manhattan  Island  and  New-Jersey. 

"2d.  The  State  of  New -Jersey  shall  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  of 
and  over  the  wharves,  docks  and  improvements  made  and  to  be  made 
on  the  shore  of  said  State,  and  of  and  over  all  vessels  aground  on 
said  shore,  or  fastened  to  any  such  wharf  or  dock,  except  that  the 
said  vessels  shall  be  subject  to  the  quarantine  or  health  laws  and  laws 
in  relation  to  passengers  of  the  State  of  New-York,  which  now  exist 
or  which  may  hereafter  be  passed. 

"  3d.  The  State  of  New  Jersey  shall  have  the  exclusive  right  of  re- 


f 


ll       No.  25.]  19 

gulating  the  fisheries  on  the  westerly  side  of  the  middle  of  the  said 
waters,  provided  that  the  navigation  be  not  obstructed  or  hindered." 

The  other  provisions  of  the  compact  relating  to  the  division  of  ju- 
risdiction and  right  of  property  of  the  Kill  Van  Kull,  the  sound  be- 
tween Staten-Island  and  New-Jersey,  lying  w^est  of  Woodbridge 
Creek  and  the  Raritan  bay,  need  not  be  transcribed,  as  they  are  not 
invoked  in  the  consideration  of  this  question. 

From  the  portions  quoted  from  the  compact,  the  jurisdiction  and 
property  is  thus  distributed  : 

The  State  of  New- York  has  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  the  waters 
of  the  bay  of  New  York,  of  the  Hudson  river,  west  of  Manhattan 
Island,  and  ovor  the  lands  covered  by  water to  the  low  water  mark 
on  the  New^-Jersey  shore,  and  over  Bedlow's  and  other  islands  men- 
tioned. 

New-Jersey  has  the  exclusive  right  of  property  in  the  land  under 
water^  west  of  the  middle  of  the  bay  of  New-York,  and  west  of  the 
middle  of  the  Hudson  river,  opposite  Manhattan  Island.  That  State 
has  also  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  the  wharves,  &c.,  &c.,  on  the  shore 
of  that  State,  and  over  vessels  aground  on  her  shores,  ov  fastened  to 
her  wharves^  subject  to  the  health  and  passenger  laws  of  New- York, 
and  has  also  the  right  of  regulating  the  fisheries  on  the  westerly  side 
of  the  middle  of  the  w^aters  of  New-York  bay  and  Hudson  river,  op- 
posite Manhattan  Island. 

In  other  w^ords,  New-Jersey  has  no  jurisdiction  over  the  waters  of 
New- York  bay,  or  Hudson  river,  opposite  Manhattan  Island,  except 
those  flowing  ahove  low-water  mark  on  Jersey  shore,  but  all  that  juris- 
diction is  excliisively  vested  in  the  State  of  New-York. 

The  right  has  been  claimed  for  New-York  and  maintained,  to  legis- 
late exclusively  on  the  subject  of  pilots,  as  far  back  as  the  year  1694. 
The  act  of  the  colonial  assembly  of  New-York,  found  in  Livingston 
and  Smith's  laws,  passed  in  1731,  provides  for  the  appointment  of 
pilots.  The  first  section  is  as  follows  :  "  That  all  and  every  per- 
son nominated  and  appointed  by  the  president  or  the  governor,  &c., 
&c.,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  his  majesty's  council  for 
the  colony,  to  be  pilot  or  pilots  between  Sandy-Hook  and  New-York, 
shall  be  the  pilot  or  pilots  from  the  port  of  New-York  to  Sandy- 
Hook,  and  from  Sandy-Hook  to  the  port  of  New- York,  and  to  and 
from  these  places. 

The  sixth  section  provides  that  if  any  person  or  persons,  not  ap- 
pointed in  the  manner  before  mentioned  or  deputed  by  those  so  au- 
thorized as  aforesaid,  shall  presume  to  take  upon  him  or  them  to  pilot 
any  ship  or  vessel  going  into  or  coming  out  of  the  said  port  of  New- 
York,  shall  forfeit  and  pay  the  sum  of  ^£3.  The  first  section  of  32 
George  II.  passed  March  7th,  1759,  contains  the  same  prohibition, 
under  the  increased  penalty  of  £b. 

The  statute  of  February  19th,  1819,  in  the  22d  section,  maintains 
the  same  exclusive  jurisdiction.    It  is  as  follows  :  "  That  the  branch 
pilots,  the  deputy  pilots,  &c.,  &c.,  shall  be  the  only  persons  employed 
'        in  the  pilot  service,  to  and  from  the  port  of  New-York,  by  the  way 
of  Sandy-Hook."    So  the  9th  section  of  the  statute  of  12th  April, 


20 


( Senate 


1837,  enacted  in  the  face  of  the  act  of  Congress  of  4:th  March  of  the 
same  year  declares,  that  "  any  person  not  holding  a  license  as  pilot^ 
who  shall  pilot  or  offer  to  pilot' any  ship  or  vessel  to  or  from  the  port 
of  New- York  by  the  way  of  Sandy-Hook,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor^  and  on  conviction  thereof  be  punished  by  a  Jine^  not 
exceeding  fifty  dollars,  or  imprisonment^  not  exceeding  one  month  : 
but  no  such  penalty  shall  be  incurred  by  piloting  or  offering  to  pilot 
any  vessel  which  shall  have  been  in  sight  of  Sandy-Hook,  with  the 
usual  signal  for  a  pilot,  and  shall  have  waited  two  hours  without  one 
having  offered  ;  nor  shall  this  section  apply  to  the  captain  or  master 
belonging  to  any  vessel  acting  as  pilot  thereof  by  virtue  of  this  act." 

The  expression  "  7iot  holding  a  license  as  pilot^^  manifestly  refers 
to  the  license  granted  in  pursuance  of  the  laws  of  this  State  ;  and  the 
law  of  12th  of  April,  1837,  is  palpably  in  collision  with  the  act  of 
Congress  authorizing  others  than  those  holding  such  license,  to  pilot 
vessels  to  or  from  the  port  of  New-York  by  the  way  of  Sandy-Hook; 
consequently,  if  the  act  of  Congress  is  constitutional,  the  statute  of 
New-York  is  a  dead  letter,  under  the  6th  article  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution. Was  it  becoming  the  dignity  of  this  State  that  her  Legis- 
lature should,  advisedly^  pass  a  law  that  was  without  force  or  effect, 
and  is  it  not  the  paramount  obligation  of  the  State  to  vindicate  that 
law,  in  the  assertion  of  her  sovereign  rights? — a  law  only  to  be  sustained 
by  overthrowing  the  conflicting  legislation  of  Congress,  and  establish- 
ing its  unconstitutionality. 

The  legislation  by  New-York  has  always  been  exclusive  and  co- 
extensive with  the  jurisdiction  over  her  waters,  until  February  8th, 
1837,  when  the  State  of  New- Jersey,  passed  a  law,  the  preamble  of 
which  is  as  follows  :  "  That  whereas  the  commerce  of  New-Jersey 
requires  every  facility  and  aid  usually  extended  to  maritime  States, 
and  whereas  at  this  time  there  are  no  licensed  pilots  for  the  safe  con- 
duct of  onx  increasing  commerce^  rendering  us  wholly  dependent  upon 
a  neighboring  State,  Therelore,  &c.,  &c."  In  truth  that  act  was  pas- 
sed that  it  might  be  adopteil  by  Congress,  as  it  was,  within  the  short 
period  of  twenty-four  days,  more  for  the  purpose  of  giving  employ- 
ment to  the  citizens  of  New-Jersey,  within  the  jurisdiction  of  JVew- 
Yorkj  than  on  account  of  her  increasing  commerce  ;  and  we  now  find 
New-Jersey  pilots  navigating  vessels  (not  under  any  pretence  of  juris- 
diction over  the  waters  from  that  State  to  the  high  seas,)  through  the 
narrows,  to  and  from  sea  ;  through  the  East  river,  to  and  from  Cor- 
lear's  Hook  and  the  Navy-Yard,  Brooklyn  ;  they  even  take  them  from 
the  slips  and  w^harves  of  the  city  of  New-York,  at  the  extreme  points 
of  that  city,  whether  in  the  East  or  Hudson  rivers  ;  they  also  leave 
them  at  quarantine,  and  take  them  thence.  How,  it  is  asked,  can  it 
be  said  that  the  port  of  Tompkinsville,  at  quarantine,  is  a  port  "  sit- 
uate upon  waters  which  are  the  boundary  between  two  States 

The  act  of  1837  uses  the  term  "  ^or^,"  not  port  of  entry ^  and  it  is 
well  known  that  the  court  of  admiralty  recognizes  Tompkinsville, 
Williamsburgh,  Sing-Sing,  Newburgh  and  other  small  places,  as  ports, 
and  has  frequently  so  held  under  the  admiralty  jurisdiction  of  the  lien 


No.  25. J 


21 


law  of  material  men  of  this  State,  equally  with  the  port  of  New- 
York. 

Can  this  claim  of  New- Jersey  be  justified  on  the  ground  that  these 
waters  are  a  common  highway  ?  that  the  right  of  navigation  belongs 
to  every  citizen  of  the  United  States  1  True,  it  is  a  highway  ;  but  it 
is  equally  true  that  the  control  and  regulation  of  a  highw^ay,  wit/wi 
the  body  of  a  State j  is  the  province  and  prerogative  of  the  sovereignty 
through  which  it  passes  ;  nor  is  that  reg2^/«^2o?i  incompatible  with  the 
fi'ee  enjoyment  of  such  highway.  Every  vessel  on  waters  within  the 
territory  of  a  sovereign  State,  is  subjected  to  the  municipal  regula- 
tions of  that  State.  It  might  with  equal  propriety  be  claimed,  that 
because  the  streets  of  the  city  of  New-York  are  common  highways, 
the  State  of  New-.Tersey  has  the  right  to  issue  licenses  to  her  citizens 
as  drivers  of  hackney-coaches.  The  right  of  enjoying  the  highway 
for  the  purposes  of  navigation  is  far  different  from  the  exercise  of  mu- 
nicipal authority  over  such  highway  ;  nor  can  such  municipal  autho- 
rity be  exercised  conjointly  by  two  States,  especially  at  this  port. 

The  quarantine  or  health  laws. of  New-York  form  an  important  part 
of  her  legislation  ;  the  importance  of  it  to  the  welfare  of  her  citizens 
and  the  prosperity  of  the  State  is  too  well  known  to  need  comment. 
In  the  execution  of  those  laws  the  aid  of  her  pilots  is  constantly  de- 
manded, under  severe  penalties,  in  hailing  vessels  approaching  her 
ports,  and  admonishing  them  of  the  requirements  of  those  laws.  How 
stands  the  collision  of  jurisdiction  on  this  subject  ]  What  right  has 
this  State  to  impose  upon  the  pilots  of  New-Jersey  the  performance  of 
the  same  duties,  which  are  enjoined  in  every  statute,  to  be  observed 
by  her  own  pifots  l  Congress  has  not  confided  to  New- York  juris- 
diction over  the  pilots  of  New-Jersey.  There  is  no  guarantee  that 
New- Jersey  may  find  it  proper  or  expedient  to  notice  this  measure  of 
precaution  ;  it  is  not  now  a  duty  in  her  present  statute^  establishing 
a  pilot  system.    This  is  the  practical  effect  of  the  act  of  Congress. 

It  is  repeated,  that  Congress  has  the  right  to  committhis  wrong  di- 
rectly, by  appointing  her  own  officers,  as  a  regulation  of  commerce, 
but  may  not  indirectly,  by  merging  the  jurisdiction  of  both  States  in 
each  other. 

The  municipal  jurisdiction  of  the  State  of  New-Jersey  thus  exerci- 
sed, is  entirely  repugnant  to  the  second  title  of  the  Revised  Statutes, 
treating  on  "  the  sovereignty  and  jurisdiction  of  New-York."  That 
title  declares  that  "  the  sovereignty  of  this  State  extends  to  all  places 
w^ithin  the  boundaries  thereof,  &c.,  &c.,  but  the  extent  of  such  juris- 
diction over  places  that  have  been  or  may  be  ceded  to  the  United 
States,  shall  be  qualified  by  the  terms  of  such  cession."  The  second 
section  declares  that  "  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  her  Governor  and  of  all 
subordinate  officers  of  this  State  to  maintain  its  sovereignty  and  juris- 
diction." 

It  is,  in  conclusion,  respectfully  submitted  that  Congress  has  au- 
thorized an  invasion  of  the  sovereignty  of  New- York  by  New- Jersey, 
through  hasty  and  ill-advised  legislation.  It  is  an  usurpation  of  au- 
thority not  to  be  submitted  to — inconsistent  with  the  dignity  of  the 
State — and,  if  acquiesced  in,  may  soon  be  followed  by  other,  and,  if 


22 


[Senate 


possible,  more  flagrant  encroachments.  The  laws  of  this  State  have 
jealously  guarded  her  integrity,  in  making  it  the  duty  of  her  officers 
^^to  maintain  and  defend  its  sovereignty  and  jurisdiction."  As  citizens 
of  the  State,  we  claim  to  be  protected  in  our  rights  thus  trampled  un- 
der foot,  and  confidently  hope  that  measures  may  be  taken  to  secure 
to  us  the  uninterrupted  enjoyment  of  our  franchise,  and  effectually  to 
check  the  pretensions  of  a  neighboring  State,  sustained  though  she  be 
by  the  sanction  of  Congress.  In  vain  have  we  sought  redress  at  the 
hands  of  those  who  inflicted  the  wrong,  but  now  confidently  believe 
that  the  subject  is  so  presented  as  to  require  the  vindication  of  the 
supremacy  of  the  State,  and  involves  a  more  serious  question  than  the 
protection  of  the  humble  pilot.  Establish  our  rights,  and  our  duty 
will  follow  ;  but  "  misera  servitus  est,  ubi  jus  est  vagum  ant  incog- 
nitum." 

Respectfully  submitted. 


I 


PETITION 

Of  the  Pilots  of  New-York,  by  way  of  Sandy- 
Hook. 


TO  THE  LEGISLATURE  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW-YORK 

The  Memorial  of  the  Pilots  of  the  Port  of  New-York,  by  the  way 
of  Sandy-Hook, 

Respectfully  Represents  : 

That  they  J^ave  been  duly  licensed  in  pursuance  of  the  provisions 
of  the  laws  of  this  State,  to  pilot  vessels  to  and  from  the  port  of 
New- York,  by  the  way  of  Sandy -Ho ok. 

That  in  faith  of  the  protection  of  those  laws,  they  have  embarked 
their  fortunes  in  the  purchase,  building,  and  equipment  of  pilot  boats 
necessary  and  proper  to  the  efficient  and  useful  discharge  of  the  ap- 
propriate duties  of  their  office. 

That  on  the  4th  of  March,  1837,  Congress  passed  an  act  entitled 
"  An  act  concerning  pilots"  in  the  following  words  :  "  Be  it  enacted 
that  it  shall  and  may  be  lawful  for  the  master  and  commander  of  any 
vessel  coming  into  or  going  out  of  any  port  situate  upon  Avaters 
which  are  the  boundary  between  two  States,  to  employ  any  pilot  duly 
licensed  or  authorized  by  the  laws  of  either  of  the  States  bounded  on 
the  said  waters  to  pilot  any  vessel  to  or  from  said  port  ;  any  law, 
usage  or  custom  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding." 

And  your  memorialists  further  show  that  under  and  by  virtue  of  the 
said  act,  and  under  and  by  virtue  of  an  act  of  the  State  of  New-Jer- 
sey entitled  An  act  to  establish  and  regulate  pilots  for  the  ports  of 
Jersey  city,  Newark,  and  Perth  Amboy,  by  the  way  of  Sandy-Hook," 
passed  the  8th  of  February,  1837,  and  under  and  by  virtue  of  a  sup- 
plemental act  of  the  State  of  New-Jersey,  passed  the  13th  of  Febru- 
ary, 3838,  the  pilots  licensed  and  commissioned  by  the  State  of  New- 
Jersey,  have  been,  and  now  are  engaged,  in  piloting  vessels  to  and 
from  the  city  of  New-York,  and  the  city  of  Brooklyn,  and  Tomp- 


24  [Sen 


ATE 


^dnsville  in  the  county  of  Richmond,  by  the  way  of  Sandy-Hook, 
on  waters  within  the  exclusive  territorial  jurisdiction  of  the  State  of 
New- York. 

And  your  memorialists  further  show  that  such  actings  and  doings 
of  the  pilots  of  New- Jersey  are  in  absolute  derogation  of  the  rights 
and  interests  of  your  memorialists,  guarantied  to  them  by  the  laws  of 
the  State  of  New-York,  and  in  manifest  violation  of  the  sovereignty 
of  the  State  of  New-York,  inasmuch  as  the  said  act  of  Congress 
sanctions  and  authorizes  the  raunicipal  authorities  of  the  State  of 
New- Jersey  to  exercise  the  sovereign  power  and  authority  of  that 
State  within  the  territorial  confines  of  the  State  of  New-York. 

Your  memorialists  therefore  humbly  pray  that  your  honorable  body 
will  adopt  such  measures  as  may  seem  meet  and  proper  to  try  and 
determine  whether  the  aforesaid  act  of  Congress  does  or  does  not 
transcend  the  legislative  power  of  the  Federal  Government,  and 
whether  the  acts  exercised  under  its  sanction,  and  under  the  autho- 
rity of  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New-Jersey  by  the  citizens  of  that 
State,  are  or  are  not  in  violation  of  the  sovereignty  of  the  State  of 
New-York,  and  in  contempt  of  her  laws. 

And  your  memorialists  will  ever  pray,  &c.  &c. 

James  Burger,  Richard  Blake, 

John  T.  Kelso,  J.  Livingston, 

John  Hyer,  Thomas  Vail, 

Jno.  Maginn,  Henry  J.  Bullinger, 

John  Martino,  Isaac  S.  Vanderbilt, 

Jarvis  P.  Cahert,  Stephen  Martino, 

Corns.  Hope,  Jr.  Henry  M.  Wheeler, 

John  Henderson,  John  Fredell, 

James  H.  Smith,  Wm.  P.  Turnure, 

Robt.  W.  Johnson,  Josiah  Johnson, 

John  L.  Turnure,  Maurice  D.  Weaver, 

Kuyler  E.  H.  Dibble,  John  Dean. 


SEYMOUR  DURST 


